[jbthekid]

They were free in World at War? I payed 10 bucks for 'em in 2009.

[Ermac20]

its stupid when the dlc is as much as the fucking game god i hate craptivision

[FullStreak12]

jbthekid posted:

They were free in World at War? I payed 10 bucks for 'em in 2009.

on pc they came in the updates

[jbthekid]

Lucky! Another reason why I'd rather have a nice PC to play on!

[Grim Joker]

FullStreak12 posted:

I would love it to be more like CoD4, but they most likely would just improve on Black Ops. Call of Duty 4 is easily my favorite, then Black Ops. I love WaW though it is pretty much MW1 with a WW2 setting so I go back to it sometimes.

and fuck you activision I want my DLC but



Just about $60 for 12 new MP maps, 4 new zombie maps, and 4 zombie maps that were FREE in World at War. The game is $40, lower the fucking DLC please.

Uh, the extra zombie maps were not free in World At War. You had to buy 10 dollar map packs to get them.

Edited:

Nevermind, didn't see that they came with updates.

Edited:

Ermac20 posted:

its stupid when the dlc is as much as the fucking game god i hate craptivision

Activision is definitely not the only company to do it. Epic Games comes to mind immediately.

[dass]

FullStreak12 posted:

I would love it to be more like CoD4, but they most likely would just improve on Black Ops. Call of Duty 4 is easily my favorite, then Black Ops. I love WaW though it is pretty much MW1 with a WW2 setting so I go back to it sometimes.

and fuck you activision I want my DLC but



Just about $60 for 12 new MP maps, 4 new zombie maps, and 4 zombie maps that were FREE in World at War. The game is $40, lower the fucking DLC please.

For that price, I'm gonna get 2 games which I've been searching everywhere forever.

Edited:

Grim Joker posted:

Uh, the extra zombie maps were not free in World At War. You had to buy 10 dollar map packs to get them.

Edited:

Nevermind, didn't see that they came with updates.

Edited:


Activision is definitely not the only company to do it. Epic Games comes to mind immediately.

And thats just multiplayer. Imagine a company that cuts game content from the actual singleplayer and sells it as DLC.
Now that is a real bitch imo.

Theres something really small in MW3 that pisses me off.

Character movement seems to be broken. I sometimes look at someone and I see them violently aiming at 2 different places.
How can I explain this better...
I usually use the players movement to know where exactly are they aiming at and if they have aknowledged me, which would be obvious if they were aiming in the same direction as I was.
Thing is, in MW3, it seems the players movement seen on world models are severly different from the real movement and the real positions the players look at.

Yesterday for example, I saw a guy in the distance and I thought he was confused or something, because he seemed like he was looking in 2 different directions like a crazy guy.
In reality, he was actually looking normally at the things around him and he gently aimed at me and killed me.

In my view, it was as if he was completely drunk, aiming everywhere. But in reality, he was quite normally aiming at me from right to left, where I was, and then promptly shot me.
This little "bug" or bad design has fooled me lots of times. I think they aren't aiming straight at me and are aiming like deranged lunatics at everything, and in reality, they are.
Its as if the motion design is more limited in mw3 compared to past titles.

[Grim Joker]

dass posted:

For that price, I'm gonna get 2 games which I've been searching everywhere forever.

Edited:


And thats just multiplayer. Imagine a company that cuts game content from the actual singleplayer and sells it as DLC.
Now that is a real bitch imo.

Theres something really small in MW3 that pisses me off.

Character movement seems to be broken. I sometimes look at someone and I see them violently aiming at 2 different places.
How can I explain this better...
I usually use the players movement to know where exactly are they aiming at and if they have aknowledged me, which would be obvious if they were aiming in the same direction as I was.
Thing is, in MW3, it seems the players movement seen on world models are severly different from the real movement and the real positions the players look at.

Yesterday for example, I saw a guy in the distance and I thought he was confused or something, because he seemed like he was looking in 2 different directions like a crazy guy.
In reality, he was actually looking normally at the things around him and he gently aimed at me and killed me.

In my view, it was as if he was completely drunk, aiming everywhere. But in reality, he was quite normally aiming at me from right to left, where I was, and then promptly shot me.
This little "bug" or bad design has fooled me lots of times. I think they aren't aiming straight at me and are aiming like deranged lunatics at everything, and in reality, they are.
Its as if the motion design is more limited in mw3 compared to past titles.

Could be their sensitivity being really high.

As for the cutting Single Player stuff for DLC, EA did that with Mass Effect 3, and Epic did that with Gears of War 3. Epic also had 60 dollars worth of DLC available on Day 1, rather than at least spacing it out like Activision does.

[FullStreak12]

Grim Joker posted:

Uh, the extra zombie maps were not free in World At War. You had to buy 10 dollar map packs to get them.

Edited:

Nevermind, didn't see that they came with updates.

I think it was PC only.

[Raidyr]

People cry about CoD DLC but THQ is honestly worse. Go on Steam right now and look at the DLC for Saints Row: Third, Space Marine, or DoW2 Retribution.

[FullStreak12]

Raidyr posted:

People cry about CoD DLC but THQ is honestly worse. Go on Steam right now and look at the DLC for Saints Row: Third, Space Marine, or DoW2 Retribution.

Saints Row 3 is a pretty bad game all around anyways, but the DLC is cheaper than CoD, but still easily not worth it.

[Niven]

And now EA is doing the DLC packs for BF3 too

[FullStreak12]

Niven posted:

And now EA is doing the DLC packs for BF3 too

EA is being a massive twat. The BC2 dlc free except for Vietnam, but I got it on sale for $5 and was easily worth it. Now BF3 has maps from an old game for fucking $15.

[Grim Joker]

FullStreak12 posted:

EA is being a massive twat. The BC2 dlc free except for Vietnam, but I got it on sale for $5 and was easily worth it. Now BF3 has maps from an old game for fucking $15.

It also comes with weapons and stuff, but yeah, they can't really act superior to Activision at this point, since they're doing the same thing.

[dass]

Grim Joker posted:

Could be their sensitivity being really high.

As for the cutting Single Player stuff for DLC, EA did that with Mass Effect 3, and Epic did that with Gears of War 3. Epic also had 60 dollars worth of DLC available on Day 1, rather than at least spacing it out like Activision does.

Nah, I think their sensibility wasn't really that high. The killcam showed him pretty chill when looking around, but seeing him from my view, he looked like a character switching from left to right really fast in a 2d game.

Edited:

Grim Joker posted:

It also comes with weapons and stuff, but yeah, they can't really act superior to Activision at this point, since they're doing the same thing.

I sort of "suck their dick" because they include weapons. IMO, maps aren't a big enough selling point, but maps and weapons sort of make it more viable.

[jbthekid]

Grim Joker posted:

Uh, the extra zombie maps were not free in World At War. You had to buy 10 dollar map packs to get them.

Edited:

Nevermind, didn't see that they came with updates.

Edited:


Activision is definitely not the only company to do it. Epic Games comes to mind immediately.

That's true about Epic Games. I was considering re-purchasing Gears of War 3 today. So I could play with my friends. But if you don't have almost ALL the DLC there's a very slim chance of playing with others. Although the season pass is $30. A way better price than that of ELITE, being $50.

Edited:

dass posted:

Nah, I think their sensibility wasn't really that high. The killcam showed him pretty chill when looking around, but seeing him from my view, he looked like a character switching from left to right really fast in a 2d game.

Edited:



I sort of "suck their dick" because they include weapons. IMO, maps aren't a big enough selling point, but maps and weapons sort of make it more viable.

I think you mean "ride", not "suck". You put up with them.

[dass]

jbthekid posted:

That's true about Epic Games. I was considering re-purchasing Gears of War 3 today. So I could play with my friends. But if you don't have almost ALL the DLC there's a very slim chance of playing with others. Although the season pass is $30. A way better price than that of ELITE, being $50.

Edited:



I think you mean "ride", not "suck". You put up with them.

People usually refer to to as "sucking X's cock"

[jbthekid]

Never heard it, haha. I've heard of dick riding. As in you're a fan of them and never stop following them. "So and so was dick riding that company" Kind of like some people would have done with BF3, instead of MW3.

[pawelte1]

dass posted:

For that price, I'm gonna get 2 games which I've been searching everywhere forever.

For that price I could get two copies of MW3 including shipping (in Poland).

[dass]

jbthekid posted:

Never heard it, haha. I've heard of dick riding. As in you're a fan of them and never stop following them. "So and so was dick riding that company" Kind of like some people would have done with BF3, instead of MW3.

Huh weird. I've seen countless times people saying "... keep sucking activision's cock" but never seen any dick riding comments

Edited:

pawelte1 posted:

For that price I could get two copies of MW3 including shipping (in Poland).

You lucky bastard :c although I was lucky to get mw2 at 50€ before it went to 60.

[pawelte1]

dass posted:

You lucky bastard :c although I was lucky to get mw2 at 50€ before it went to 60.

To be honest game prices are one of the few good things about this country. Petrol is as expensive as in the rest of Europe, so I would rather live someone else, with higher game prices but higher wages, too.

[SoUl_ReApEr2]

Does anyone wanna come on MW3 or black ops on xbox 360 and annoy some brits(i'm english pretending to be american or any other country on different matches but fool them all and is hilarious fun) but then english kids fall for it so bad it's funny as hell.

[Grim Joker]

jbthekid posted:

That's true about Epic Games. I was considering re-purchasing Gears of War 3 today. So I could play with my friends. But if you don't have almost ALL the DLC there's a very slim chance of playing with others. Although the season pass is $30. A way better price than that of ELITE, being $50.

Elite gives you the same exact deal.

Gears of War 3 Season Pass gives you 40 dollars worth of DLC for 30 dollars.

Call of Duty Elite gives you 60 dollars worth of DLC for 50 dollars.

In fact, Call of Duty elite also comes with like, four goddamn TV shows and the ability to upload longer gameplay clips to your Youtube, so I'd say it's a better deal than a Season Pass any day of the week.

Edited:

dass posted:

I sort of "suck their dick" because they include weapons. IMO, maps aren't a big enough selling point, but maps and weapons sort of make it more viable.

I agree that weapons add a little more bang for your buck, but as someone who plays BF3 pretty avidly and got Karkand, the weapons they give you in the DLC generally isn't better than what's in the base game, so you never end up using it.

I just think it's bullshit that with both Call of Duty and Battlefield 3, if you buy all the DLC, it's like you've bought two brand new copies of the game instead of one.

[FullStreak12]

IMO B2K was a horrible pack for $15. I got it free from DICE via twitter though.

[Grim Joker]

FullStreak12 posted:

IMO B2K was a horrible pack for $15. I got it free from DICE via twitter though.

I think all 15 dollar DLC is pretty terrible. For the same price I could buy a goddamn movie ticket and get two hours of entertainment, and then have enough left over to grab some dinner from fast food.

[hexpunK]

Grim Joker posted:

I think all 15 dollar DLC is pretty terrible. For the same price I could buy a goddamn movie ticket and get two hours of entertainment, and then have enough left over to grab some dinner from fast food.

It's kind of hard to measure the time an expansion or DLC is entertaining for to compare it to a film. But yeah, a lot of the $15 DLCs and most expansions around that price don't provide as much content as you'd hope for. B2K sold like mad because of the maps it contained, and the weapons it added more than the fact it existed. I don't see the future DLC selling as well because there won't be the "nostalgia" factor B2K had.

Still a better deal that the CoD maps in most ways though. As it added a lot more content than some half decent maps and a few rehashed ones. DICE kind of put a lot of effort into the B2K remakes compared to what I've experienced with IW/ Treyarch remakes.

[Grim Joker]

hexpunK posted:

It's kind of hard to measure the time an expansion or DLC is entertaining for to compare it to a film. But yeah, a lot of the $15 DLCs and most expansions around that price don't provide as much content as you'd hope for. B2K sold like mad because of the maps it contained, and the weapons it added more than the fact it existed. I don't see the future DLC selling as well because there won't be the "nostalgia" factor B2K had.

Still a better deal that the CoD maps in most ways though. As it added a lot more content than some half decent maps and a few rehashed ones. DICE kind of put a lot of effort into the B2K remakes compared to what I've experienced with IW/ Treyarch remakes.

Eh, to be honest I've had more fun with Call of Duty DLC than Battlefield DLC, but that's probably because I was disappointed with the Battlefield DLC. With Call of Duty they're just like "Yep it's maps" whereas in Battlefield they were like "OH MAN BETTER THAN CALL OF DUTY WITH WEAPONS AND VEHICLES AND MAPS OUT THE ASS MORE SHIT THAN YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH COMING RIGHT AT YOU OH MAN LOOK OUT WHAT'S THAT BUY IT NOWWWWWWW"

It was hyped up to be a lot more than it was, really.

[jbthekid]

I fuckin' loved Vietnam for BFBC2. If only it weren't so dead now, on console that is. :(

[usaokay]

Grim Joker posted:

Uh, the extra zombie maps were not free in World At War. You had to buy 10 dollar map packs to get them.

New multiplayer maps are free on the PC. Those are included in a patch, so look it up if you think I'm bullshitting.

[hexpunK]

Grim Joker posted:

Eh, to be honest I've had more fun with Call of Duty DLC than Battlefield DLC, but that's probably because I was disappointed with the Battlefield DLC. With Call of Duty they're just like "Yep it's maps" whereas in Battlefield they were like "OH MAN BETTER THAN CALL OF DUTY WITH WEAPONS AND VEHICLES AND MAPS OUT THE ASS MORE SHIT THAN YOU KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH COMING RIGHT AT YOU OH MAN LOOK OUT WHAT'S THAT BUY IT NOWWWWWWW"

It was hyped up to be a lot more than it was, really.

Yeah, EA really pushed the marketing guys and PR guys who work for them and DICE too much. Almost every aspect of BF3 was overhyped by them. It hasn't made the game bad, it's just not quite what they were making us expect at all.

[Grim Joker]

usaokay posted:

New multiplayer maps are free on the PC. Those are included in a patch, so look it up if you think I'm bullshitting.

Did you not see my other post? I didn't see that they were free on PC until I made that post. I don't think you're bullshitting, I just didn't know they were free for PC.

Edited:

hexpunK posted:

Yeah, EA really pushed the marketing guys and PR guys who work for them and DICE too much. Almost every aspect of BF3 was overhyped by them. It hasn't made the game bad, it's just not quite what they were making us expect at all.

Yeah. That's really my only issue with it. It's super overmarketed and overhyped when really it's just another modern shooter.

[ashxu]

So the S&D server I play on in CoD4 added Chinatown to it's map rotation.

I wish CoD4 had more urban locations instead of tons of middle eastern maps.

[trotskygrad]

ashxu posted:

So the S&D server I play on in CoD4 added Chinatown to it's map rotation.

I wish CoD4 had more urban locations instead of tons of middle eastern maps.

http://www.codutility.com/

problem solved

[pawelte1]

After like 900 kills with CM901, I finally got what I was waiting for.

[SoUl_ReApEr2]

Woop now your weapon looks like it's made out of cheese.

[ashxu]

trotskygrad posted:

http://www.codutility.com/

problem solved

I doubt the server would put a custom map into rotation. It's games.on.net and all their servers no matter what game usually run vanilla with very little customized content. (At most convenience plug-ins)

[Nexosz]

trotskygrad posted:

http://www.codutility.com/

problem solved

lmao

[SoUl_ReApEr2]

I remember joining a crouch only server on MW3 on pc... I ran around still then left, I don't see the point in servers stopping you using things in that are in the games for a reason.

[Highwind017]

That has got to be the stupidest idea for a clan ever.

[dass]

No Submachine guns
No Assault Rifles
No Shotguns
No Pistols
No Launchers
No Grenades or special grenades
No Equipment
No knife
Sniper only
Quickscoping only
No sprinting
No scrubs lol

I will buy a barrel full of gas and matches if I see a server like that and put the owner inside along with a lit match.

[Highwind017]

dass posted:

No Submachine guns
No Assault Rifles
No Shotguns
No Pistols
No Launchers
No Grenades or special grenades
No Equipment
No knife
Sniper only
Quickscoping only
No sprinting
No scrubs lol

Final Destination

Im sorry, it had to be done.

I should really buy Black Ops 1 when i get a chance...